tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post2598534230978158868..comments2023-10-14T03:58:59.333-06:00Comments on The Tao of D&D: Swords Shall Be Bent . . . and Logic TooAlexis Smolenskhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-28240276806977396882014-07-27T13:47:46.206-06:002014-07-27T13:47:46.206-06:00I should say up front that I agree with your concl...I should say up front that I agree with your conclusions, but I think some of the journey there is a little dubious.<br /><br />I find that story from Polybius highly suspect. It is literally incredible that any culture would go to war with such obviously deficient weapons.<br /><br />From that account, simple spears would have been a vastly superior weapon, and well within the capabilities of the Gauls. Why go to the trouble of forging a sword that can be used for only a single blow, when - with less metal and less skill - you could forge a spearhead that is significantly more effective?<br /><br />In this case, I would say that story doesn't pass the smell test, and is extremely likely to be embellished to nearly the point of falsehood.<br /><br />Additional to the common-sense argument against this claim, the <i>Oxford Handbook of Warfare in the Classical World</i> supports the idea that this story is greatly embellished, and cites evidence that the greater part of recovered Gallic swords are actually of fine quality, and that they generally in fact did have points (in contrast to Polybius' claims).<br /><br />I would also disagree with your argument that one weapon is vastly dissimilar to another, and that familiarity with one is useless in using another. From Fiore's work (admittedly 2000 years after the time of Polybius's story), we see that in the Middle Ages, at least, there was an understanding that there are fundamental principles that underlie all martial arts, whether with the empty hand, the sword, or the spear.<br /><br />Fiore's system, in my opinion, is based on the principal that all fighting is fundamentally similar, and that the weapon used is a secondary consideration. We see a similar idea in George Silver's system, where he describes his True Fight in terms of several grounds and governors, none of which refer to any specific weapon.<br /><br />Just some food for thought as an aside or addendum to the main thrust of an excellent post.Charles Ahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00941603544547428940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-11837621023891671892014-07-25T07:07:58.077-06:002014-07-25T07:07:58.077-06:00I like (and use) the idea of Orcs trading with oth...I like (and use) the idea of Orcs trading with other intelligent species. But there's another detail about "Orc clans in the traditional vision" that helps me justify Orc technologies: Orcs make awesome soldier-slaves. They are strong and just smart enough to perform complex tasks, but disorganized and easy to subjugate. So Orc culture has a history of enslavement, both as soldiers and workers. When the evil empire falls, perhaps generations of Orcs later, you wind up with a pretty skilled population, with only a vague idea how to self-govern.Johnnyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13021302861939781925noreply@blogger.com